B-147419, DEC. 1, 1961

B-147419: Dec 1, 1961

Additional Materials:

Contact:

YOU NOW ARE AMENDING YOUR CLAIM TO INCLUDE. YOUR CLAIM FOR PAY FOR MILITARY LEAVE FOR THE YEAR 1951 WAS DISALLOWED ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE RIGHT TO MILITARY LEAVE FOR "ACTIVE DUTY" EXTENDS BACK ONLY TO MILITARY SERVICE PERFORMED AFTER JANUARY 1. THE RECORD SHOWS THAT YOU WERE AN ARMY RESERVE OFFICER. THAT YOU WERE SEPARATED FROM THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE APRIL 20. YOU WERE ENTITLED TO MILITARY LEAVE FOR 1951 AND 1952. YOU SAY THAT CONTENTION IS SUPPORTED BY THE HOUSE AND SENATE REPORTS ON SECTION 804 (A) OF THE ARMED FORCES RESERVE ACT OF 1952. WHICH STATED THE PURPOSE THEREOF WAS "TO EXTEND SUCH LAW (ACT OF MAY 12. OUR DECISIONS HAVE CONSISTENTLY HELD THAT THE ACT OF MAY 12. WAS LIMITED IN ITS APPLICATION TO THE REGULAR ANNUAL TRAINING PERIODS OF NOT TO EXCEED 15 DAYS IN EACH CALENDAR YEAR AND HAD NO APPLICATION TO EXTENDED OR INDEFINITE PERIODS OF ACTIVE MILITARY DUTY.

B-147419, DEC. 1, 1961

TO MR. PHILIP M. RISIK:

ON OCTOBER 3, 1961, YOU REQUESTED RECONSIDERATION OF THAT PART OF OUR OFFICE SETTLEMENT OF AUGUST 30, 1961, WHICH DISALLOWED YOUR CLAIM FOR 11 DAYS PAY FOR MILITARY LEAVE DURING THE CALENDAR YEAR 1951. YOU NOW ARE AMENDING YOUR CLAIM TO INCLUDE, ALSO, PAY FOR MILITARY LEAVE FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 1952.

YOUR CLAIM FOR PAY FOR MILITARY LEAVE FOR THE YEAR 1951 WAS DISALLOWED ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE RIGHT TO MILITARY LEAVE FOR "ACTIVE DUTY" EXTENDS BACK ONLY TO MILITARY SERVICE PERFORMED AFTER JANUARY 1, 1953, THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ARMED FORCES RESERVE ACT OF 1952.

THE RECORD SHOWS THAT YOU WERE AN ARMY RESERVE OFFICER; THAT YOU WERE SEPARATED FROM THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE APRIL 20, 1951, FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENTERING THE ARMED FORCES; AND THAT YOU REMAINED ON ACTIVE MILITARY DUTY UNTIL YOUR DISCHARGE MARCH 23, 1953.

YOU CONTEND THAT UNDER THE ACT OF MAY 12, 1917, 40 STAT. 72, AS AMENDED, YOU WERE ENTITLED TO MILITARY LEAVE FOR 1951 AND 1952. YOU SAY THAT CONTENTION IS SUPPORTED BY THE HOUSE AND SENATE REPORTS ON SECTION 804 (A) OF THE ARMED FORCES RESERVE ACT OF 1952, 66 STAT. 506, WHICH STATED THE PURPOSE THEREOF WAS "TO EXTEND SUCH LAW (ACT OF MAY 12, 1917, AS AMENDED) TO THE NAVAL RESERVE, MARINE CORPS RESERVE, AND COAST GUARD RESERVE ON A UNIFORM BASIS, AND INSERTS LANGUAGE SIMILAR TO THAT DEFINED IN THE BILL FOR CLARITY.'

OUR DECISIONS HAVE CONSISTENTLY HELD THAT THE ACT OF MAY 12, 1917, WAS LIMITED IN ITS APPLICATION TO THE REGULAR ANNUAL TRAINING PERIODS OF NOT TO EXCEED 15 DAYS IN EACH CALENDAR YEAR AND HAD NO APPLICATION TO EXTENDED OR INDEFINITE PERIODS OF ACTIVE MILITARY DUTY. SEE 19 COMP. GEN. 513 (COPY HEREWITH FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE). PRESUMABLY, THE CONGRESS WAS AWARE OF OUR DECISIONS AT THE TIME OF ITS CONSIDERATION OF THE ARMED FORCES RESERVE ACT OF 1952. THEREFORE, WE CANNOT AGREE THAT ONE OF THE PURPOSES OF SUCH ACT WAS AN EXTENSION TO THE NAVAL RESERVE AND THE COAST GUARD RESERVE OF THE RIGHT TO MILITARY LEAVE FOR ACTIVE DUTY PERIOD WHICH THE ARMY ALREADY HAD. ON THE CONTRARY, IT IS OUR VIEW THAT SUCH ACT FOR THE FIRST TIME AUTHORIZED MILITARY LEAVE FOR ACTIVE DUTY IN ALL THE ARMED FORCES. 37 COMP. GEN. 313.

ON THE BASIS OF THE FOREGOING WE CONCLUDE THAT DURING THE YEARS 1951 AND 1952 THERE WAS NO AUTHORITY UNDER THE LAW TO PAY YOU FOR MILITARY LEAVE OF ABSENCE FROM YOUR CIVILIAN POSITION.

IT FOLLOWS THAT THE DISALLOWANCE OF YOUR CLAIM FOR MILITARY LEAVE FOR THE YEAR 1951 WAS CORRECT, AND THAT YOUR ADDITIONAL CLAIM FOR MILITARY LEAVE FOR THE YEAR 1952 LIKEWISE MUST BE DENIED.

Mar 13, 2018

Interoperability ClearinghouseWe dismiss the protest because the protester, a not-for-profit entity, is not an interested party to challenge this sole-source award to an Alaska Native Corporation under the Small Business Administration's (SBA) 8(a) program.